On 23.04.2010, at 17:49, ataggart wrote: > One problem with requiring the "other" object to be of the same type > is that it would break the current model, e.g.: > > user=> (= '(1 2 3) [1 2 3]) > true
I'd want this only for defrecord, which is a more limited (but also more convenient) way to define types. For the more basic and general deftype, everything should be possible. However, a perhaps better way to arrive at the same goal is to provide a macro that takes care of the type comparison. > I'm left to wonder if it the more correct implementation of the > desired behavior is not to override the equals, but rather to > implement Comparable. Comparable requires a fully defined order relation, if I remember correctly. And it's not used by the standard Clojure comparison operators. Konrad. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Clojure" group. To post to this group, send email to clojure@googlegroups.com Note that posts from new members are moderated - please be patient with your first post. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to clojure+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/clojure?hl=en
